is osx sever allow in a virtual machine

It's completely allowed to install OS X Server editions on a virtual machine, so you can install any Mac OS X Server version (normally, virtualization apps offer you Leopard, Snow Leopard, Lion and Mountain Lion) on a virtualization application like Parallels, VMware Fusion or VirtualBox

It depends on the OS X Server version you get, but I have heard that Snow Leopard Server has got now a reduced cost buying it by phone at the Apple Online Store. Try calling the Apple Online Store and ask them for the cost

You can find it at the Apple Online Store > http://store.apple.com/us

That's the number. If you are living in another country, choose your country > http://store.apple.com/us/browse/open/country_selector

Apple now sells SLS for $19.99: 1.800.MYAPPLE (1.800.692.7753) - Apple Part Number: MC588Z/A (telephone orders only) and maybe US & Canada only.

If you are outside of the USA or Canada and they will not sell it to you, I recently purchased a copy and sent it by International Priority Mail to Italy, which of course, increases the initial shipping costs & tax by about $30 for a total cost of about $55.

I sent it on March 12th and it arrived on March 30th.

Why are you interested in running a Server version of Mac OS X in virtualization?

mende1 wrote:

It's completely allowed to install OS X Server editions on a virtual machine, so you can install any Mac OS X Server version (normally, virtualization apps offer you Leopard, Snow Leopard, Lion and Mountain Lion) on a virtualization application like Parallels, VMware Fusion or VirtualBox

Only on Apple Mac hardware... use in virtualization on PC hardware is a violation of the EULA.

> Only on Apple Mac hardware... use in virtualization on PC hardware is a violation of the EULA.

Why is that - does anyone know? I am building a new PC which has enough memory to run a couple of virtual machines, and I would really have liked to run OS X on it... but I'm not allowed to. That's daft. Is there some technical reason, or is it just a very old and tiresome anti-PC thing on Apple's part? I can't understand why they would still deliberately refuse to allow OS X to be run on anything but Apple hardware. All you're doing is limiting your market...

Apple is a hardware company, and are not in the business of writing software for other PC vendor's products. When they tried that in the '90's they ended up 90 days from going out of business. They learned from their previous mistakes and are now one of the most profitable companies.

This would make sense if that's what was happening, but it isn't. It's the whole point of VIRTUAL machine. The virtual machine itself it running under ESXi. ESXi runs on various hardware, but it is still ESXi. That's all the VM knows, is the host software it is running on, not the host's OS or hardware. There is nothing for Apple to write here, only VMWare. And in the case of VMWare, the support for OS X is already a part of ESX. You can take the bits required to run OSX in VMWare and put them on ESX running on non-Apple hardware and OS X VMs run fine, so this is literally a licensing issue. It is indeed market limiting. See the statement here: http://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US&cmd=display KC&externalId=2005793

Notice how it says "due to Apple licensing restrictions" because that's the only restriction. Let's not make excuses for Apple here.

I'm not running ESX infrastructure on Apple hardware. Not an enterprise worthy one anyways. No one in their right mind would. Apple doesn't make hardware powerful enough to do this and break/fix is way too time consuming on their hardware by comparison. I've said this hundreds of times...Apple hardware is not backbone of large enterprise hardware. It's made to be seen. Give Apple hardware to your users, but you don't run your infrastructure off of it.

I think you misunderstand his answer and hence you are answering a different question:

JTeagle1969 asks why does the EULA prohibit the running of OS X on non-Apple hardware. He owns a PC and wants to run OS X on it in virtualization if it was permissible.

BobHarris answered that Apple is a hardware company. More broadly put, Apple makes its profit on the sale of Macs not on the sale of OS X. If this was not obvious before, it sure is now that Yosemite is given to Mac users for free.

While there is some antitrust questions raised by the EULA prohibition on running OS X in virtualization on a non-Mac, there is just not enough profit in that are for anyone with large enough pockets to litigate that issue and it is doubtful that the FTC or Justice Department would consider this small segment serious enough for their attention.

I'd agree if it didn't also say "and are not in the business of writing software for other PC vendor's products." and wasn't replying to the post it did, but that isn't the case. It insinuates Apple would have to do something other than agree in this case.

I am sorry, but I do not understand what you are saying. Can you repost and articulate your point in a few more clear sentences. Thank you.